Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No they didn't. They didn't know who he was, and I think that's another thing the jury (if there is one) will have to answer. This becomes a little confusing, because Arbery's mother knew who McMichaels was, the man who had helped prosecute her son for crimes. It's not reciprocal - McMichaels doesn't appear to know who Arbery is.
Here are the questions for the court:
"Did McMichaels know the identity of the repeat trespasser in the neighborhood?"
and
"Is it reasonable that McMichaels believed this man who he gave to chase to, had committed felonies".
You have no idea what questions will be "before the court"
And lets just ignore that whole part of the statue regarding citizens arrest that states the FELONY must occur within the citizens "presence or his IMMEDIATE knowledge" since none of that fits the narrative you have worked so hard to build
I was addressing another post where there was a statement that he hadn't witnessed a crime immediately before giving chase.
And saying, I believe correctly, that you don't have to catch someone in the commission of a crime at that moment if you have reason to believe he had committed crimes in the past.
Which McMichaels had a reason to believe.
He wasn't observed "looking around". He was observed going into the house, and after that you can't see him. Additionally, he was chased off. As he was the last time McMichaels knew of his presence in English's home. Chased off. It's hard give someone a pass on committing a crime when you chase them off after they've trespassed.
Yeah.........unless you know the homeowner claims nothing was stolen.
Chasing Arbery then getting him hemmed in between two cars while standing in the street with a shot gun. Would place Arbery in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.
You said they were guilty of assault.
Major fail on the immediacy requirement.
Guilt can be plead to, or determined by a trial. How did you determine that they are already guilty?
It’s clear that you have no intellectual honesty left. But hey, keep posting fabricated nonsense and I’ll keep calling you out on it.
You have no idea what questions will be "before the court"
And lets just ignore that whole part of the statue regarding citizens arrest that states the FELONY must occur within the citizens "presence or his IMMEDIATE knowledge" since none of that fits the narrative you have worked so hard to build
Simply wrong. Immediate Knowledge requires an offense not a felony. A felony simply opens the arrest cause to suspicion not certainty.
It DOES NOT remove the financial risk from the owner.
Nothing needs to be stolen for there to be a risk to the owner or the builders.
Would YOU want to be the owner of a home where a "curious" pregnant mother wondered in to check out the layout, then tripped, fell and impaled herself on some rebar or something?
How much do you think that would end up costing you? I mean she was just curious, right? Go be curious on someone elses dime.
We are not talking about someone getting hurt. we are talking about the action of trespassing which is a misdemeanor. Under GA law you can not chase someone and detain them for a misdemeanor.
I'm getting a little dizzy from going round and round, and I'm sure you are too.
He did report it, in the original 911 call on feb. 23. He said he's been in the neighborhood breaking on video . . . or something like that.
It's McMichael's believe that it's likely Arbery is responsible for a variety of thefts, considering the number of times he's been caught on surveillance video in places he had no right to be in the same timeframe.
So. I think your question a few posts back was spot on. The jury will have to decide if it was reasonable for McMichaels to believe Arbery had committed a felony in the past when he gave chase.
If the case goes to trial. But anyway, yes, that's the core question of this case.
There is no evidence in the public domain that Arbery has been on anyone's surveillance video at the time a break in or theft occurred.
We are not talking about someone getting hurt. we are talking about the action of trespassing which is a misdemeanor. Under GA law you can not chase someone and detain them for a misdemeanor.
Yes, I know this, and that is not the point.
The act of trespassing can lead to a lawsuit or injury claims against the home owner and/or construction firms.
I'm not at all talking about the after effect of being chased or detained.
I'm simply addressing this nonsense about all these posters who claim its no big deal because they do it all the time. They are just being selfish and saying their curiosity outweighs the possible impact to those folks who own or are involved in construction at the house.
Its a VERY good reason why all of this "I/he was just curious" and its harmless nonsense is just a boat load of selfish BS.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 5 days ago)
35,620 posts, read 17,948,343 times
Reputation: 50641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
Yeah.........unless you know the homeowner claims nothing was stolen.
The homeowner has changed his story many times. He originally said he was missing $2500 in fishing equipment, which the McMichael's somehow knew although English states he didn't tell them.
Just like they knew he had been in that house before, through Perez's video.
Fascinating. Do you know how the thing came out in the end?
The case is still ongoing but it was appealed to the GA Supreme Court and they ruled that the defendant was likely to succeed in the self defense argument as it related to the murder/manslaughter charges but felt that he could still likely be charged with unlawful possession of a firearm since he had a prior felony conviction and he brought a gun to the house.
That was consistent with how I viewed it, that he should likely face some legal consequences but that murder was the wrong charge, since he had not come to the house intending to kill the deceased.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
